alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 536.7 Treatment of carryback credits. ( a ) Carryback credits earned in a compliance category in any model year may be used in carryback plans approved by NHTSA, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 32903(b), for up to three model years prior to the year in which the credit was earned.
( b ) For purposes of this part, NHTSA will treat the use of future credits for compliance, as through a carryback plan, as a deferral of penalties for non-compliance with an applicable fuel economy standard.
( c ) If NHTSA receives and approves a manufacturer's carryback plan to earn future credits within the following three model years in order to comply with current regulatory obligations, NHTSA will defer levying fines for non-compliance until the date(s) when the manufacturer's approved plan indicates that credits will be earned or acquired to achieve compliance, and upon receiving confirmed CAFE data from EPA. If the manufacturer fails to acquire or earn sufficient credits by the plan dates, NHTSA will initiate compliance proceedings.
( d ) In the event that NHTSA fails to receive or approve a plan for a non-compliant manufacturer, NHTSA will levy fines pursuant to statute. If within three years, the non-compliant manufacturer earns or acquires additional credits to reduce or eliminate the non-compliance, NHTSA will reduce any fines owed, or repay fines to the extent that credits received reduce the non-compliance.
( e ) No credits from any source (earned, transferred and/or traded) will be accepted in lieu of compliance if those credits are not identified as originating within one of the three model years after the model year of the confirmed shortfall.
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 49288]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4220]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, Unsolicited Immunology Single 
Project Application.
    Date: September 19, 2007.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge 6700, 6700B 
Rockledge Drive, Room 3123, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Alec Ritchie, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, DHHS/NIH/NIAID/DEA Scientific Review Program, 6700B 
Rockledge Drive MSC 7616, Room 3123, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-
1614, [email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 21, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-4220 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
1491O-13-111

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSI'ORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

NITlAlSISIG

DATES: This AD is effective [INSERT DATE 35 DAYS AFTER DATE OF

PUBLICA nON IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

which could result in a fire or explosion.

to prevent electrical arcing on the fuel tank boundary structure or inside the fuel tanks,

Ainvorthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -300, and -300ER

results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this A

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

777-200, -300, and -300ER series airplanes. This AD requires installing Teflon sleeving Rout;ngSvmtlQl

m1(Xf)

under the clamps of certain wire bundles routed along the fuel tank boundary structure, NITlAt.S/StG

7b'-

and cap sealing certain penetrating fasteners of the main and center fuel tanks. This AD ATE

s/;nlo

Series Airplanes

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Model

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27042j Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-225-ADj

/10531 _ " .

Amendment 39-**; AD **J~:Z-OIO- 2..•..•-(2-

R1N 2120-AA64

•

C- c;--e"---- The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of

""

certain publications listed in the AD as of [INSERT DATE 35 DAYS AFTER DATE 0 9~1//o

PUBLICA nON IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P. O. Box 3707,

Me 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1,

fax 206-766-5680; e-mail me.boecom@boeing.com; Intemet

o
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT AnON

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

(Docket No. FAA-Z007-27042j Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-22S-ADj

[4910-I3-P~

I

ONCURRl:NCES

ovn"G SYMBOL

I/hJWHIW 1I"mAl.5/SIG

1:8 'Wit: 'I

. Amendment 39-**; AD **J

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Compa~y Model 777-200~ -300, and -30GER

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule,

to prevent electrical arcing on the fuel tank boundary structure or inside the fuel tanks,

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

ADDRESSES: for service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data"& Services Management, P. O. Box 3707,

MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, extension I,

fax 206-766-5680; e-mail me.boecomla:lboeing.com; Internet
1210-AB32-2-1375.html[7/26/2015 2:46:02 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jw0-48rf

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1871

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

Address: United States, 

General Comment

In support of a pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of rights, pro-freedom & liberty stance, get your damn socialist,

 communist, Marxist, fascist, liberal progressive, control freak hands out of every aspect of our lives and our

 retirement planning! I am adamantly against a nanny, welfare, police state of existence! If the federal

 government chooses dictatorship tyranny, I will be your enemy! If the federal government chooses the

 constitution and bill of rights, I will be your ally! - Which is it going to be??
IV

House Calendar No. 64

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 214

[Report No. 107–172]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2505) to amend title 18, United

States Code, to prohibit human cloning.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 30, 2001

Mrs. MYRICK, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2505) to amend

title 18, United States Code, to prohibit human cloning.

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution

2 it shall be in order without intervention of any point of

3 order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2505) to

4 amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit human

5 cloning. The bill shall be considered as read for amend6 ment. The amendments recommended by the Committee

7 on the Judiciary now printed in the bill shall be considered

8 as adopted. The previous question shall be considered as
2

HRES 214 RH

1 ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further

2 amendment thereto to final passage without intervening

3 motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill, as

4 amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman

5 and ranking minority member of the Committee on the

6 Judiciary; (2) the further amendment printed in the re7 port of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolu8 tion, if offered by Representative Scott of Virginia or his

9 designee, which shall be separately debatable for 10 min10 utes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and

11 an opponent; (3) after disposition of the amendment by

12 Representative Scott, the further amendment in the na13 ture of a substitute printed in the report of the Committee

14 on Rules, if offered by Representative Greenwood of Penn15 sylvania or his designee, shall be in order without interven16 tion of any point of order, shall be considered as read,

17 and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally di18 vided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent;

19 and (4) one motion to recommit with or without instruc20 tions.
House Calendar No. 64

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 214

[Report No. 107–172]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2505)

to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit human cloning.

JULY 30, 2001

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted February 2, 2018*

Decided June 22, 2018

Before

DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge

MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 17-3011

FELIX J. BRUETTE, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

RYAN ZINKE, 

United States Secretary of the Interior, 

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the 

United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Wisconsin.

No. 17 C 286

William C. Griesbach,

Chief Judge.

O R D E R

Felix Bruette appeals from an order dismissing his second lawsuit against the 

Secretary of the Interior seeking a court order enforcing an 1856 treaty between the 

Stockbridge and Munsee Indians and the United States and recognizing his claim of 

 

* We agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and 

record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not 

significantly aid the court. FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 17-3011 Page 2

tribal rights under that treaty. Bruette’s first suit was dismissed for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction. (The judge identified other flaws as well: the suit was both untimely 

and raised only a nonjusticiable political question.) Bruette appealed, but his two-page 

brief did not address the substance of the district court’s decision or otherwise develop 

an argument, so we dismissed the appeal for noncompliance with Rule 28(a) of the 

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Bruette v. Jewell, 638 F. App’x 528 (Mem.) (7th Cir.

2016).

About a year later, Bruette filed another lawsuit against the Secretary seeking to 

litigate the same dispute about his claimed treaty rights. The same district judge again 

dismissed the suit for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and Bruette appealed. The 

Secretary urges us to dismiss this second appeal because it suffers from the same defect 

as the first: noncompliance with Rule 28(a). Alternatively, the Secretary argues that 

Bruette’s second suit is blocked by preclusion principles, sovereign immunity, the 

statute of limitations, and because it raises a nonjusticiable political question. 

We agree that the appeal must be dismissed for noncompliance with Rule 28(a). 

The argument section of Bruette’s brief contains just three sparse sentences announcing 

that he disagrees with the district court and that his civil rights have been violated. 

Although Bruette is representing himself, all appellants—even those proceeding pro 

se—must file a brief that contains more than just a generalized assertion of error. 

Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir. 2001) (explaining that pro se filings are 

construed liberally, “but still we must be able to discern cogent arguments in any 

appellate brief, even one from a pro se litigant”). Bruette has failed to develop any 

argument for why the district court was wrong to dismiss his latest complaint. 

Accordingly, there is nothing for us to review. The appeal is DISMISSED.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 983 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 983

   To require the Secretary of Energy to assign the same priority to 
 providing renewable energy production incentive payments for landfill 
gas facilities as the priority assigned to providing such payments for 
                       other biomass facilities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 13, 2001

  Mrs. Bono introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Secretary of Energy to assign the same priority to 
 providing renewable energy production incentive payments for landfill 
gas facilities as the priority assigned to providing such payments for 
                       other biomass facilities.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. LANDFILL GAS FACILITIES.

    Section 1212(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 
13317(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The 
Secretary shall assign the same priority to payments for landfill gas 
facilities as to payments for closed loop biomass facilities.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Robert Corcoran, Respondent, v. The Village of Peekskill, Appellant.

Judgment and order denying new trial and order granting extra allowance affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Pratt, J.:

Dykman, J., not sitting.
Exhibit 4.2


    
      

      

    

    

      Exhibit
        4.1

      


      BRAVERMAN
        INTERNATIONAL, P.C.

      Certified
        Public Accountants

      1255
        McDonald Drive

      PRESCOTT,
        AZ 86303

      CELL
        602-881-3870

      PHONE
        928-771-1122, FAX 928-777-8378

      


      hiluv007@aol.com

      


      March
        27,
        2006

      


      To
        The
        Board of Directors,

      FUSA
        Capital Corporation

      


      This
        letter is being sent to you as notification that the client/auditor relationship
        with Braverman International, P.C. is herewith reinstated effective today.
        Therefore we are not withdrawing from the audit of FUSA Capital
        Corporation.

      


      A
        letter
        reinstating this relationship is also being sent to the Securities and Exchange
        Commission today and you are thereby required to file Form 8-K notifying
        them of
        this matter. 

      


      Sincerely,

      /s/
        Ivan
        Braverman

      


      Ivan
        Braverman, President

      Braverman
        International, P.C.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

J

- 8

- 2021

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner

v.

DONALD B. MOREMAN

,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2626 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 112 DB 2019

Attorney Registration No. 47805

( Fayette County )

ARGUED: March 10 , 20 21

O RDER

PER CURIAM DECIDED: MARCH 18

, 2021

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board

and following oral argument, Donald B. Moreman is disbarred from the Bar of this

Commonwealth and he shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217. Respondent

shall pay cos ts to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS FILED IN THE COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT ON
FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          23,413
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  169,983
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,894
<INVENTORY>                                    230,126
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               462,200
<PP&E>                                         268,691
<DEPRECIATION>                                 122,868
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 933,257
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          247,288
<BONDS>                                            362
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           558
<OTHER-SE>                                     238,057
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   933,257
<SALES>                                      1,009,128
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,015,373
<CGS>                                          750,486
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  750,486
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,451
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,213
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (26,441)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,846
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (40,563)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (17,538)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (58,101)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.05)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                                       6,089,069
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,330,316
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,192,358
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,749,692
<PP&E>                                         285,589
<DEPRECIATION>                                 114,850
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,040,327
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          821,320
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    233,105
<COMMON>                                        27,944
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,040,327
<SALES>                                      2,744,874
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,854,317
<CGS>                                          893,913
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,941,230
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                913,087
<INCOME-TAX>                                   311,363
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   601,724
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .22
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 21


     The following are the registrant's subsidiaries, other than subsidiaries
that, if considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not
constitute a significant subsidiary:


                                                                 Jurisdiction
                                                                     of
Name of Subsidiary                                              Incorporation

BHC Communications, Inc.                                          Delaware
         Chris-Craft Television, Inc.                             Delaware
                  KCOP Television, Inc.                           California
                  Oregon Television, Inc.                         Oregon
         Pinelands, Inc.                                          Delaware
         United Television, Inc.                                  Delaware
                  UTV of San Francisco, Inc.                      California
                  UTV of San Antonio, Inc.                        Texas
                  UTV of Baltimore, Inc.                          Delaware
                  UTV of Orlando, Inc.                            Delaware
                  United Television Sales, Inc.                   Delaware
Chris-Craft Industrial Products, Inc.                             Delaware
|  | Cooling Water Intake Structures - CWA §316(b)             Recent                     Additions | Contact                     Us |                     Print                     Version                     Search:                     EPA                     Home > Water > Water                     Science > Industrial                     Water Pollution Controls > Cooling                     Water Intake Structures - Section 316(b) > Phase                     I > Economic and Engineering Analyses for Proposal |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

||
||
§ 39.85 What services must PVOs provide to passengers with a disability on board a passenger vessel? As a PVO, you must provide services on board the vessel as requested by or on behalf of passengers with a disability, or when offered by PVO personnel and accepted by passengers with a disability, as follows: ( a ) Assistance in moving about the vessel, with respect to any physical barriers rendering an area not readily accessible and usable to the passenger.
( b ) If food is provided to passengers on the vessel, assistance in preparation for eating, such as opening packages and identifying food;
( c ) Effective communication with passengers who have vision impairments or who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, so that these passengers have timely access to information the PVO provides to other passengers (*e.g.,* weather, on-board services, delays).